The Corner

Study: Common Core Barely Improves Student Performance, If It’s a Boost at All

The Common Core State Standards represent a sea change in American education policy, but evidence for the standards’ effectiveness has been hard to come by. As I noted last fall, George Washington University’s compendium of over 60 research articles related to the Common Core contained just two papers analyzing its impact on test scores, and the evidence was mixed at best. Even the Common Core’s validation committee acknowledged the lack of evidence behind the movement. “It was pretty clear from the start that nobody thought there was sufficient evidence for any of the standards,” one committee member said.

Now the American Institutes for Research has published a working paper comparing the achievement scores of Kentucky students before and after the state’s transition to Common Core. It’s a careful and comprehensive analysis. To make a long story short, Common Core might be responsible for a small test score gain in the range of 0.01 to 0.04 standard deviations.

The higher end of the range reflects the (questionable) assumption that Common Core’s adoption led to a “preparation effect” – test score gains made after the standards were legally adopted but before they were implemented in the classroom. And if factors aside from Common Core affected test scores — Kentucky made other education-policy changes around the same time — the gains could be even smaller, meaning basically zero.

In the end, the most the study’s authors are willing to conclude is that the transition to Common Core does not seem to have hurt Kentucky students. That’s not an insignificant finding, given the dire predictions made by some opponents. And Common Core supporters can argue that it’s too early to assess the effects of the new standards without allowing for an adequate adjustment period. Quite true. But both points illustrate that the state of knowledge on the standards is not nearly where it should be to justify such a swift and sweeping policy change.

Jason Richwine is a public-policy analyst and a contributor to National Review Online.

Most Popular


Cold Brew’s Insidious Hegemony

Soon, many parts of the United States will be unbearably hot. Texans and Arizonans will be able to bake cookies on their car dashboards; the garbage on the streets of New York will be especially pungent; Washington will not only figuratively be a swamp. And all across America, coffee consumers will turn their ... Read More
National Security & Defense

The Warmonger Canard

Whatever the opposite of a rush to war is — a crawl to peace, maybe — America is in the middle of one. Since May 5, when John Bolton announced the accelerated deployment of the Abraham Lincoln carrier group to the Persian Gulf in response to intelligence of a possible Iranian attack, the press has been aflame ... Read More

The Merit of Merit-Based Immigration

Having chain-migrated his way into the White House and a little bit of political power, Donald Trump’s son-in-law is shopping around an immigration plan. And if you can get past the hilarious juxtaposition of the words “merit-based” and “Jared Kushner,” it’s a pretty good one. As things stand, the ... Read More
NR Webathon

Socialism Is about Taking, Not Giving

The snakiest of snake-oil pitches goes like this: Give us some of your freedom and we’ll take care of you. Socialists have been making similar claims back as far as Plato. The end result doesn’t have to be Venezuela. It can just be . . . Europe. What’s wrong with Europe? Despite a turn away from ... Read More
NR Webathon

We’ve Had Bill Barr’s Back

One of the more dismaying features of the national political debate lately is how casually and cynically Attorney General Bill Barr has been smeared. He is routinely compared to Roy Cohn on a cable-TV program that prides itself on assembling the most thoughtful and plugged-in political analysts and ... Read More